~ Thinking outside the box about Cambodia

Category Archives: Justice

By now, you must be extremely sick and tired of the word “strongman” or “strong man” that every media refers to the autocrat that is not only fighting the flood of the monsoon in the City of Tonlé Buon Mouk but also has become demoniacally despotic against the opposition and its members, the media and the civil societies. Since Noteworthy News page has chronologically and extensively documented on what has been going on since 2 September 2017, let for our part talk about something else and try to answer some of the questions raised by your students, like why the strongman is weak and so desperate. Oxymoronical, isn’t it?!

Merriam-Webster provides two definitions to the word “strongman”:
– a politician or leader who uses violence or threats;
– a man who performs in a circus and who is very strong.

However, Thesaurus gives three definitions:
– a person who performs remarkable feats of strength, as in a circus;
– a political leader who controls by force; dictator;
– the most powerful or influential person in an organization or business, by reason of skill in the formulation and execution of plans, work, etc.

Merriam-Webster gives the definition of “weak” as: lacking strength, mentally or intellectually deficient, not factually grounded or logically presented, not able to function properly, deficient in the usual or required ingredients, not having or exerting authority or political power.

Merriam-Webster also defines “desperate” as: having lost hope, giving no ground for hope,involving or employing extreme measures in an attempt to escape defeat or frustration, suffering extreme need or anxiety, involving extreme danger or possible disaster.

The questionsthat your students have asked could be reformulated as follows:
– What motivates the autocrat to adopt current policy of dictatorial repression towards Cambodian people and institutions?
– How strong is the strongman in ruling Cambodia?

Before going forward, there is an unmovable and solid premise that has to be anchored in one’s mind: The autocrat was a revolutionary communist, a rebel Khmer Krâhâm and a full-fledged member of the genocidal Khmer Rouge of Pol Pot and Ieng Sary. The fact that he betrayed his movement and sought political refuge and ideological mentorship in a foreign country changes nothing to his conviction and loyalty to what he had learned in his revolutionary youth: power, once acquired, must be preserved at any cost. Once a Khmer Rouge, always a Khmer Rouge.

In Noteworthy News page, your students can find plenty of views, opinions, information, analysis and comments by a plethora of pundits, writers, journalists and reporters to whom appreciation and gratitude are honorably extended because without them our knowledge would be blind of both eyes.

Fear is a new-born monster that haunts the autocrat since July 2013; that monster became bigger in July 2016. He can’t wipe out from his mind and eye the million of Cambodians flowing in the streets of the City of Tonlé Buon Mouk and also towards Takéo. Never in his lifetime has he ever been greeted similarly; never has he ever been acknowledged and received so warmly and wholeheartedly by the mass of million; never has he ever been solemnly and proudly respected by the mass of million. The ego was shot and wounded by an invisible arrow made of Khmer conscience and awakening, a mass of million of Khmer citizens that he refuses to acknowledge their true love for the country and the democracy that they have just been endowed. The message was clear and visible, but he can’t see or nor read due to optical deficiency, perhaps.

Then came the results of the 2017 communal elections. The “dot” on the “i”. The monster has grown up and played hard, but quietly. The fear has increased in intensity and there is no medical remedy available, even from Singapore! Paid consultants could not provide different mathematical and scientific projections. The trend is now known and unchangeable towards July 2018. The party base is stunt, quiet, shuts their mouth, shrinks and feels embarrassed. Higher up in the party echelon, same attitude of languor and lassitude. At Koh Pich, what he sees is rows and rows of uninterested, cold, incurious and insensible audience. Fear and uncertainty are all over their face as well. Garments workers are now cajoled day after day with promise of every sort including photo-ops of casual lunches “à la Khmère.” But the inconvincibles remain inconvincible; they know the difference between hypocrisy and sincerity, principle and baloney. Dignity is always behind their mask and the smile at the sewing machines.

Fear has been joined by two new companions: panic and despair.

10 months to go and the party is lethargic: no new ideas nor thinkers, no new platform, no perspective nor inspiration, and no road map to the future. Party, assembly, senate, government, justice are the same marionettes executing and marching to the order of the autocrat. On stage, marionettes look happy because they are brainless and manipulated; but when the show is over they are a pile of discarded and valueless puppets. What to do to escape the inevitable? Without power and with their marketable skills below zero, they would be reduced to the status of being ruled and governed; it would be too shameful to accept it. This is where the old Khmer Rouge devilish tactic resurrects and creeps out: dictatorship, repression, jail and guns. To hell with democracy! To hell with rule of law! To hell with respect of human rights and dignity. To hell with freedom of expression or association! To hell with whoever disagrees with me!

Fear in facing the 2018 elections and possibly losing it is the internal weakness of the man who lacks courage and prowess and who feels so insecure to be a real man in the battle of ideas, perspectives, programs and vision for the country and its people, in other words , the battle at the ballot box.
Where is his intestinal fortitude to face the challenge of a democratic, free and fair election? His heart and guts fail.
Does red revolutionary valor melt in the mass of accumulated corrupted wealth that he can’t enjoy in-or-out of the country? Fear of losing that wealth weakens the audacity and brazenness that he once had in poverty and rebellion time.
Does the man at the age of 65 still have the physical and intellectual daringness and intrepidity of his youth to contest the young democracy and the thirst for freedom aspired by new and different generations of Cambodians? No man is made of stone unless he’s a sculpted statue standing alone and decorated with pigeons droppings.
Can he, in his loneliness, picture lines of voters throughout the country dropping their ballot in the box? He can’t anymore when such image of possible reality gives him cold feet. A man or a chicken!?

If fear and despair are not the motive, let him prove that he can enter the electoral arena with all the contestants like in July 2017, that he is a man who is not afraid of another man in front of the ballot box where the people of Cambodia are the judges and arbiters. Mano a mano, with ballots as gloves. Once he’s in the arena, let close the gate and let the monster loose! Ave!

If he won fair and square, he would be able to restore his dignity and his ego recover its pride and vanity. If he lost, history may have nice words towards his legacy.

Not long ago – courtesy of The Phnom Penh reporting – he also publicly and ignominiously said to the garment workers that “the 1991 Paris Peace Accords .. was dead in the water.” He was showing off his ignorance to the local workers, but he has no courage to officially and diplomatically communicate his belief to the 18 State that were signatories to the said Peace Agreements. A weak strongman talks the talk but never walks the walk. A fool has a big mouth and a very small brain.

It’s not yet too late to make a trajectory adjustment. Failing that, the presumed strongman is not only weak and desperate, but he turns himself into a coward dictator.And as the world has known, every dictator, past and present, on this planet, commands no respect and admiration from the people he rules, and only sycophants and flatterers shower him with false praise and approval. However, once he’s gone, it’s his descendants who have to live in shame and dishonor. Any memory about Pol Pot, his leader, once?

For ease and quick reference that your students and you might need in the future, this letter contains links that speak volume about difference when words were spoken and when the speakers change their attitude. Is this hypocrisy in Khmer politics, or are Khmer politicians truly hypocritical?

RFA’s article reproduced a long sentence pronounced by the strongman that contains his dim and gloomy view not only about himself but also about the situation ex-post his era. If what he said is what he meant, there is no doubt that the tone and the substance betray the strength and power that he is holding autocratically. Like the flattened Michelin tire man, the strongman is unplugged!

– Is this a self-premonition that, like in Frank Sinatra’s “My Way”, forebodes “And now, the end is near”?
– Or is this an admission of his own vulnerability as a human nature with life and death?
– Or is this an acknowledgement that the erosion of power has not only sapped his autocratic regime but also affected his own health and governing capacity?
– Has the happiness in governing autocratically already died, been buried and instead embodied in Satan of madness, rage and delusion?
– What has happened to the idea and desire to rule the country until 90 years of age?
– Why all of a sudden talking about death by voluntarily omitting its cause?
– Why associating death with end of power, when power can be transferred or ended without death?
– Has self-doubt invaded the arrogant confidence?
– Has invincibility started to abandon the suit of armor and the metallic helmet that was donned for 33 years?
– No Buddhist of sincere faith and tenet wish nobody’s death, but they wish the destruction and death of autocracy.

This is where nonsense meets sheer lunacy.
– If he disappeared, why his ministers and minions have to disappear concomitantly or simultaneously?
– If he disappeared, would his progenies who also happen to be ministers or “èk odom” melt away like wax in the heat?
– What magical force does he have to drag his ministers and minions to the same end as his?
– Is he a guru that can order his disciples to jump into the fire when he says “jump”?
– Are these the words of a madman in trance or delirium?
– On the contrary, what would his ministers and minions and their families think when they hear such foolishness and madness?

3. “គឺ​មាន​តែ​ក្រុម​យោធា និង​នគរបាល​ដែល​ឋិត​នៅ​ក្នុង​មុខងារ​សាធារណៈ​ទេ ដែល​ជា​អ្នក​គ្រប់គ្រង​សភាពការណ៍។”«នៅ​ទី​នេះ​មាន​អគ្គបញ្ជាការ ប៉ុល សារឿន អគ្គ​នគរបាល​ជាតិ នេត សាវឿន អគ្គបញ្ជាការ​រង និង​មេបញ្ជាការ​អាវុធហត្ថ​លើ​ផ្ទៃ​ប្រទេស សៅ សុខា“
So, three names are presented to the public; three names to carry the flag of repression and dictatorship; three names forming a triumvirate. If it comes true, who would be triumvir Julius Caesar, who Pompeius Magnus and who Marcus Crassus?
Assuming the designated triumvirate would take place, this would be the first time in Khmer history that three men would share power.
– Well, well, well: three Khmer sharing power? Three armed factions sharing power? Only fools fool themselves; fools can’t fool Khmer. Anybody still remember “the trio” on political campaign billboards throughout the country, one already gone, now only two still present?
– What are the national doctrine and political philosophy that bind these three triumvirs together?
– Would the soldiers, policemen and bodyguards be willing to continue part of the army of repression after the final departure of the autocrat?
– Why does the autocrat omit to mention the role that he has been nurturing for his progenies? Aren’t they good enough that daddy has to exclude them from leadership? Or are they rather be part of a plan “to go abroad”? SOS – Save Our Souls!

4. “ប៉ុន្តែ​នៅ​មាន​បណ្ដា​អង្គភាព​ដទៃ​ទៀត​ដែល​ពេល​ហ្នឹង​ជួនកាល​មាន​ការ​ញុះញង់ គឺ​វាយ​គ្រឹប​តែម្ដង”
Now the real secret is finally revealed! So a secret force is hidden somewhere and even unknown to the triumvirate’s forces. Is it the fishing boats in the waterways across the country? Among the car mechanics along major arteries or the worshipers in Bokor? The leftovers from 9 January 1979 and 1985?
The mentor has become master, and the mentee is bonded for life to the mentor whose eyes are sharper than Cyclops.

5. “ទៀ បាញ់ ក៏​អស់​តំណែង ស ខេង ក៏​អស់​តំណែង តើ​ទៅ​ត្រួត​ពី​ណា​ទៀត?”
Oh, Kacvey, these two individuals must feel betrayed by the man they have been serving through thick and thin for decades. Politics has no gratitude or loyalty. Especially, ex-KR politics. Once a KR, always a KR. KR’s wheel of power always remains bloody and soulless.
So, while still alive, he’s openly pitting the triumvirate against his two vice-premier “samdachs”, and at the same time sacrificing them in plain daylight to the altar of his self-destructive ego.
Sooner or later, the public will know whether or not these two vice-premiers are real “men” with principle and self-esteem, or are they just disposable “pawns” on the autocratic chess board.

6. “ទុក ហ៊ុន សែន ដើម្បី​នឹង​គ្រប់គ្រង”
How desperate it sounds of him to plead for his own status quo! A desperate man creates his own despair in his own desperate situation. In a state of despair, he not only oxymoronizes but also does double talking in order to confuse the public: at the beginning he created a hypothetical situation of his departure “ប្រសិនបើ​លោក​ស្លាប់​ភ្លាម“, but at the end he pleads for remaining in power “កុំ​ចង់​ឲ្យ ហ៊ុន សែន ងាប់ ទុក ហ៊ុន សែន ដើម្បី​នឹង​គ្រប់គ្រង”
It’s against any religious beliefs and virtuous principles to abandon a sick man or a desperate one. Let the experts in medical filed take care of the illness, but let Cambodians of all walks of life wish him well in his battle against his health trouble. Nobody ​”ចង់​ឲ្យ ហ៊ុន សែន ងាប់“, but nobody wants to “ទុក ហ៊ុន សែន ដើម្បី​នឹង​គ្រប់គ្រង” for ever.

Cambodians want him to respect, in a civilized and democratic manner, their voice and their concerns towards the elections on 22 July 2018 and thereafter:
– No cheating.
– No killing 100 to 200 people.
– No smashing teeth.
– No beating with bamboo sticks.

On 10 July 2016, you and your students mourned the death of Mr. Kem Ley through cold-blooded assassination. On 10 July 2017, all of you pay respect to his disappearance, his honor of being an honest Khmer, a Khmer for all Khmer.

His death is now a year-old, and so is the awakening of Khmer conscience. Time will make his death deeper into the political history of Cambodia, and will also make the Khmer conscience stronger and more determined for change.

Mr. Kem Ley’s last born son will never feel his heartbeat nor his touch, but time will reveal to him and teach him how a man of national character was his father!

The “presumed assassin” is purging his jail term sentenced by a sham kangaroo court that takes the laws into its own hands to protect the “schemer of the assassination” rather than investigate and find the TRUTH. The plot to assassinate Mr. Kem Ley is text-book Khmer Rouge, whether it is for the past, present or future. Khmer Rouge of past is always Khmer Rouge of present and future. Dark scheme to spill Khmer blood has always been their political and autocratic trademark.

A clean and un-corrupt politician was murdered, the presumed murderer in jail: perfect crime. The “schemer” smiles as he wraps himself in a cape of the demon of darkness before entering his cache like Bram Stoker’s Count Dracula.

Kacvey, your students should be assured that Mr. Kem Ley will never be forgotten.

A couple of weeks ago, you asked your students about their readiness for the commune elections on Sunday 4 June 2017, and you indicate that their positive responses are so encouraging that even yourself was surprised by their enthusiasm and determination.

Generation “DEMOCRACY”, here it comes!

Generation “DEMOCRACY” has come of age, after having:

studied and learned the tragic and genocidal history of Cambodia under the Khmer Rouge,

survived to this date with their parents and grand-parents the corrupted, nepotistic and autocratic rule of the ex-Khmer Rouge,

seen how the constitutional and acquired rights of citizenry are abused by the power (civilian, military and police) in existence with the explicit complicity of the kangaroo courts,

been victims of lands expropriations and decimation of natural habitat,

witnessed the continuous destruction of Cambodian natural resources,

endured the constant threat of arbitrary arrest and detention for expression of different ideas and opinions,

been subjected to the blindness of political obscurity of the current national leadership whose focus is mainly to protect the tyrannic power and the dishonest wealth accumulated by members of the tribe,

been astonished and shocked at how political figures who do not toe the line of autocracy are cold-bloodedly assassinated, brutally beaten by hired thugs, illegally wiretapped, and arbitrarily arrested and detained on artificial and trumped charges,

perceived that the ruling party, after 30 years of political monotony, has transformed Cambodia into a private fiefdom under the control of one man – and one man only – without accountability whatsoever,

experienced the economic hardship due to the disparity in income distribution between the corrupted 1% and the remaining 99%, and, last but not least,

given no opportunity to try or to taste the flavor of free and democratic discussions and debates.

Generation “DEMOCRACY”, the time is now yours to show that you are:

responsible citizens for yourselves, your future and Cambodia,

concerned citizens who are equal in constitutional rights and obligations with those who seek your vote and voice,

citizens who care about Cambodia that belongs to all of you together,

independent and sovereign in expressing your political opinion through secret ballot,

the owners of your belief, conviction and principle,

confident that “change” is the way that the future, since time memorial, always conducts itself.

Generation “DEMOCRACY”, you must remember that the world moves with constant changes. The most original and philosophical idea and demonstration of change are contained in an ancient Chinese classic called “Book of Change” (Yijing 易经). It goes as follows: “In ancient times, when Baoxi had come to rule over all under Heaven, he looked up and contemplated the images exhibited in the sky and looked down and observed the processes taking place on earth. He contemplated the patterns on the birds and the beasts and the properties of the land … Thus he devised the Eight Trigrams (bagua 八卦), in order to communicate with the unknown and classify the relations of every object and phenomenon on earth… Change must occur when the existing way is no longer adequate, and only through change can a new workable way be found. As long as it works, the existing way lasts. Heaven protect those who change with the change of circumstances.”

Generation “DEMOCRACY”, ask yourself: If you can’t change, who else could?
By voting, you have the capacity to move things forward. You vote, you change, and “democracy” is yours, your Cambodia.
It’s up to you to count on yourself.
Don’t live in the future with the outdated.
Get rid of the old Khmer Krâhârm’s leftover image and symbol.

Generation “DEMOCRACY”, you have the limitless power to shake up the status quo.
Exercise it, en masse.BE THE MASTERS OF YOUR OWN DESTINY!

The political atmosphere at the City of Tonlé Buon Mouk has been so depressing and rotten where vulgarity and meanness take top billing. Autocracy has become so fearful of the image that it sees though the national and social mirror that reflects the Khmer electorate rejecting its sordid and repressive attitude towards innocent citizenry, its voracious appetite for corruption, its mental savagery in repressing freedom of expression, and its ignorance towards the dignity and honor of Khmerness’s value and virtue.

In the face of such political malevolence, let spare a moment to fathom on moral value, to recalibrate our mind and spirit and to go into our innermost with philosophical reading and reflection in order to fuel the conscience with moral strength to challenge the wrong with right, injustice with justice, corruption with honesty and integrity, violence with calmness and quietude, and repression with resistance.

In the last pages of “Lives of Eminent Philosophers”, Diogenes Laertius set the seal on his entire work by citing Epicurus’s Sovran Maxims as an epilogue not only to his whole work but also to make the end of it to coincide with the beginning of happiness, a principal epicurean doctrine.

Sovran Maxims is a collection of forty (40) of the most important articles of faith (also known as “Principal Doctrines”) in ethical theory and creed in antique Greece. The collection consists of extracts from the voluminous writings of Epicurus who showed his passion for personal direction and supervision of the studies of his pupils by furnishing them with such an indispensable catechism.

1. A blessed and eternal being has no trouble himself and brings no trouble upon any other being; hence he is exempt from movements of anger and partiality, for every such movement implies weakness.

2. Death is nothing to us; for the body, when it has been resolved into its elements, has no feeling, and that which has no feeling is nothing to us.

3. The magnitude of pleasure reaches its limit in the removal of all pain. When pleasure is present, so long as it is uninterrupted, there is no pain either of body or of mind or of both together.

4. Continuous bodily pain does not last long in the flesh; on the contrary, pain, if extreme, is present a very short time, and even that degree of pain which barely outweighs pleasure in the flesh does not last for many days together. Illnesses of long duration even permit an excess of pleasure over pain in the flesh.

5. It is impossible to live a pleasant life without living wisely and well and justly, and it is impossible to live wisely and well and justly without living pleasantly. Whenever any one of these is lacking, when, for instance, the man is not able to live wisely, though he lives well and justly, it is impossible for him to live a pleasant life.

6. In order to obtain security from other men any means whatsoever of procuring this was a natural good.

7. Some men have thought to become famous and renowned, thinking that thus they would make themselves secure against their fellow-men. If, the, the life of such persons really was secure, they attained natural good; if, however, it was insecure, they have not attained the end which by nature’s own prompting they originally sought.

8. No pleasure is in itself evil, but the things which produce certain pleasures entail annoyances many times greater than the pleasures themselves.

9. If all pleasures had been capable of accumulation, – if this had gone on not only by recurrence in time, but also over the frame or, at any rate, over the principal parts of man’s nature, there would never have been any difference between one pleasure and another, as in fact there is.

10. If the objects which are productive of pleasures to profligate persons really freed them from fears of the mind, – the fears, I mean, inspired by celestial and atmospheric phenomena, the fear of death, and the fear of pain; if, further, they taught them to limit their desires, we should never have any fault to find with such persons, for they would then be filled with pleasures to overflowing from all sides and would be exempt from all pain, whether of body or mind, that is, from all evil.

11. If we had never been molested by alarms at celestial and atmospheric phenomena, nor by the misgiving that death somehow affects us, nor by neglect of the proper limits of pains and desires, we should have had no need of natural science.

12. It would be impossible to banish fear on matters of the highest importance, if the man doesn’t know the nature of the whole universe, but lived in dread of what the legends tell us. Hence without the study of nature there was no enjoyment of unmixed

13. There would be no advantage in providing security against our fellow-men, so long as we were alarmed by occurrences over our heads or beneath the earth or in general by whatever happens in the boundless universe.

14. When tolerable security against our fellow-men is attained, then on a basis of power sufficient to afford support and of material prosperity arises in most genuine form the security of a quiet private life withdrawn from the multitude.

15. Nature’s wealth at once has its bounds and is easy to procure; but the wealth of vain fancies recedes to an infinite distance.

16. Fortune but seldom interferes with the wise man; his greatest and highest interests have been, are, and will be, directed by reason throughout the course of life.

17. The just man enjoys the greatest peace of mind, while the unjust is full of the utmost disquietude.

18. Pleasure in the flesh admits no increase when once the pain of want has been removed; after that it only admits of variation. The limit of pleasure in the mind, however, is reached when we reflect on the things themselves and their congeners which cause the mind the greatest alarms.

19. Unlimited time and limited time afford an equal amount of pleasure, if we measure the limits of that pleasure by reason.

20. The flesh receives as unlimited the limits of pleasure; and to provide it requires unlimited time. But the mind, grasping in thought what the end and limit of the flesh is, and banishing the terrors of futurity, procures a complete and perfect life, and has no longer any need of unlimited time. Nevertheless it does not shun pleasure, and even in hour of death, when ushered out of existence by circumstances, the mind does not lack enjoyment of the best life.

21. He who understands the limits of life knows how easy it is to procure enough to remove the pain of want and make the whole of life complete and perfect. Hence he has no longer any need of things which are not to be won save by labour and conflict.

22. We must take into account as the end all that really exists and all clear evidence of sense to which we refer our opinions; for otherwise everything will be full of uncertainty and confusion.

23. If you fight against all your sensations, you will have no standard to which to refer, and thus no means of judging even those sensations which you pronounce false.

24. If you reject absolutely any single sensation without stopping to discriminate with respect to that which awaits confirmation between matter of opinion and that which is already present, whether in sensation or in feelings or in any presentative sensation of the mind, you will throw into confusion even the rest of your sensations by your groundless belief and so you will be rejecting the standard of truth altogether. If in your ideas based upon opinion you hastily affirm as true all that awaits confirmation as well as that which does not, you will not escape error, as you will be maintaining complete ambiguity whenever it is a case of judging between right and wrong opinion.

25. If you do not on every separate occasion refer each of your actions to the end prescribed by nature, but instead of this in the act of choice or avoidance swerve aside to some other end, your acts will not be consistent with your theories.

26. All such desires as lead to no pain when they remain ungratified are unnecessary, and the longing is easily got rid of, when the thing desired is difficult to procure or when the desires seem likely to produce harm.

27. Of all the means which are procured by wisdom to ensure happiness throughout the whole of life, by far the most important is the acquisition of friends.

28. The same conviction which inspires confidence that nothing we have to fear is eternal or even of long duration, also enables us to see that even in our limited conditions of this life nothing enhances our security so much as friendship.

29. Of our desires some are natural and necessary, others are natural but not necessary; and others, again, are neither natural nor necessary, but are due to illusory opinion. [Epicurus regards as natural and necessary desires which bring relief from pain, as e.g. drink when we are thirsty; while by natural and not necessary he means those which merely diversify the pleasure without removing the pain, as e.g. costly viands; by the neither natural nor necessary he means desires for crowns and the erection of statues in one’s honour.]

30. Those natural desires which entail no pain when not gratified, though their objects are vehemently pursued, are also due to illusory opinion; and when they are not got rid of, it is not because of their own nature, but because of the man’s illusory opinions.

31. Natural justice is a symbol or expression expediency, to prevent one man from harming or being harmed by another.

32. Those animals which are incapable of making covenants with one another, to the end that they may neither inflict nor suffer harm, are without either justice or injustice. And those tribes which either could not or would not form mutual covenants to the same end are in like cause.

33. There never was an absolute justice, but only an agreement made in reciprocal intercourse in whatever localities now and again from time to time, providing against the infliction or suffering of harm.

34. Injustice is not in itself an evil, but only in its consequence, viz. the terror which is excited by apprehension that those appointed to punish such offenses will discover the injustice.

35. It is impossible for a man who secretly violates any article of the social compact to feel confident that he will remain undiscovered, even if he has already escaped ten thousand times; for right on to the end of his life he is never sure that he will not be detected.

36. Taken generally, justice is the same for all, to wit, something found expedient in mutual intercourse; but in its application to particular cases of locality or conditions of whatever kind, it varies under different circumstances.

37. Among the things accounted just by conventional law, whatever in the needs of mutual intercourse is attested to be expedient, is thereby stamped as just, whether or not it be the same for all; and in case any law is made and does not prove suitable to the expediencies of mutual intercourse, then this is no longer just. And should the expediency which is expressed by the law vary and only for a time correspond with the prior conception, nevertheless for that time being it is just, so long as we do not trouble ourselves about empty words, but look simply at the facts.

38. Where without any change in circumstances the conventional laws, when judged by their consequences, were seen not to correspond with the notion of justice, such laws were not really just; but wherever the laws have ceased to be expedient in consequence of a change in circumstances, in that case the laws were for the time being just when they were expedient for the mutual intercourse of the citizens, and subsequently ceased to be just when they ceased to be expedient.

39. He who best knew how to meet fear of external foes made into one family all the creatures he could; and those he could not, he at any rate did not treat as aliens; and where he found even this impossible, he avoided all intercourse, and, so far as was expedient, kept them at a distance.

40. Those who best able to provide themselves with the means of security against their neighbours, being thus in possession of the surest guarantee of security, pass the most agreeable life in each other’s society; and their enjoyment of the fullest intimacy was such that if one of them died before his time, the survivors do not lament his death as if it called for commiseration.

At the outset, please allow me to quote Koul Panha, Executive Director of the Committee for Free and Fair Elections in Cambodia: “This book is long overdue and a welcome addition to the literature on contemporary Cambodian politics and international relations. It is an indispensable reference book for practitioners, theorists, activists and students engaged in elections everywhere.”

The 341-pages book referred to is: CAMBODIA VOTES – Democracy, Authority and International Support for Elections 1993-2013, by Michael Sullivan, published in 2016 by Nordic Institute of Asian Studies (NIAS) at the University of Copenhagen, Denmark, under ISBN No.: 978-87-7694-187-1.

The summary on the back cover page speaks volume:
“Elite power and the evolution of “authoritarian elections” in CambodiaThis detailed study charts the evolution of internationally assisted elections in Cambodia beginning in 1993 with the vote supervised by the United Nations Transitional Authority (UNTAC). Although the UNTAC operation was unprecedented in its size and political scope, the less-than-democratic outcome of the 1993 vote (with Hun Sen and his Cambodian People’s Party losing but remaining in power) began two decades of internationally assisted elections manipulated and controlled by Hun Sen and his ruling Cambodian People Party (CPP).

“Simultaneously, disparate international actors have been complicit in supporting “authoritarian elections” while at the same time attempting to promote a more democratic transparent accountable process. This apparent paradox has produced a relatively stable political-economic system that serves the interests of a powerful and wealthy ruling elite coalesced around the personality of Hun sen supported by international donors but at the expense of overall positive socio-economic and political change. At the same time, international involvement has also allowed opposition forces to co-exist alongside a repressive state and to compete in elections that still hold out the possibility for change. This was evidenced by the voter backlash against CPP governance during the recent 2013 elections.

“The book is especially timely because the results of the 2013 national elections suggested the CPP’s grip on power might be loosening. Now the crucial 2017 local and 2018 national elections are looming. As such, by analysing the current situation in Cambodia, its origins and possible outcomes, Michael Sullivan offers a key reference work to all those engaged with Cambodia and its future development.”

Michael Sullivan is currently an advisor to the Committee for Free and Fair Elections (COMFREL) in Phnom Penh. He has been living and working in Cambodia full-time since 2007. He worked at the Center for Khmer Studies (CKS) from 2008-13, and served as the Director from 2009. He completed a doctorate in Political Sciences at the University of London’s School of Oriental and African Studies (SOAS) in 2005. As well as elections, he has researched and published on Chinese aid to Cambodia and conservation and development issues.

Enjoy the reading and the reflections upon it! Change is not hopeless.

Ah, 14 January 2017 could be a day to be remembered! Both parties “chatted” with chats et chiens, domestic pets!

I guess you were not disappointed by not being invited to both the “wine and dine chatting party with 1,000 journalists” and the forum of opposition not only in Phnom Penh but also in France, the US and Canada. Well, you did not miss or lose anything: on the contrary, you gain a lot by keeping your dignity intact. Can’t wait to read what those 1,000 journalists or others write in their column on Monday morning(*).

One whole month of January has now gone into the new year, and stage curtain is already open on Cambodia with extremely critical reports:

Ouf! (or Fou!) What a hard and tumultuous year for Cambodia, a repressive land of awful, gruesome and harrowing political and police measures in a no-war time!

In the 57 letters we have been exchanging – beginning with “On the 1st day of 2016” and including the present one – you have witnessed how politics in the City of Tonlé Buon Mouk have not put the democracy and the respect of rule of laws and human values and rights one single step forward; all regressed horrendously at the expense of regular citizens and women/men of conscience and rectitude.

The 1% that forms the politico-economico-despotism-nepotism-corruption tribe of Hostile Takeover continues to dominate the country in every branch of power, making a full and foolish derision and contempt of the kingdom and the constitution through the grip of one and only man, the autocrat or the tyrant of contemporary Cambodia. The 99% is struggling, on the one hand to survive and to live decently with the simple and fundamental desire that their constitutional rights be respected and, on the other, to recover what has been unjustly, illegally and abusively taken away from them by the 1%.

As yesterday creates the birth of tomorrow, let make our own report on the state of the country for 2016 as a basis for shaping and charting what 2017 would bring.

THE THREE BRANCHES OF POWER
The three branches of power are reduced into the power of one man who decides on everything that is Cambodia, by threat, Facebook, public speech or anything that presents fear and impendence to his autocratic regime: wiretapping, arresting and jailing, condoning incompetence and rewarding thuggery against political opponents, banning public demonstration or even wearing Black on Monday, or deciding on whom to pardon or not to pardon. He says “A”, the legislative branch says “Yes, Sir. It’s “A”, and the justice system also echoes: “Yes, Sir. It’s “A””.
When all the power is willingly concentrated in the eye, heart and hands of one man, and one man only, it is fair game to publicly raise the motion of the truth of life, political or otherwise, i.e. What would happen to the country if that man happens to be, for example, suddenly physically and/or mentally incapacitated by the failure of his own health? Leadership of/in Cambodia should not be in a moral chaos because of one man’s ambition or fear of his own future.
Kacvey, let not forget what Heraclitus said in his fragments LXVII: “Immortals are mortal, mortals immortal, living in their death and dying in their life.”

THE NATIONAL ASSEMBLY
The national assembly is a pure lame duck (un canard boiteux) functioning with one webbed foot of 68 claw-like toes; the other foot was earlier “out of service” and now heavily bandaged with some missing toes scattered or exiled around the globe. The broken foot is trying to show off that it’s front and center of the duck, but every time it makes half-a-step, the other foot tripped it, and it becomes handicapped again.
The autocracy has been using the lame duck as a springboard to show to the world that it is an effective symbol of Cambodian democracy, ignoring that democracy does not need a symbol to be effective; all it needs is the respect of the people’s will at the ballot box.

THE GOVERNMENT
The government, reshuffled or otherwise, is a plethora of docile minions who get lost in the myriad of postings, sometimes contradicting each other, in the autocrat’s Facebook page. Is it a real government with responsibility and accountability to the people or it elected representatives, or is it a Facebook government where no one is responsible for anything or to anyone except to the autocratic head who, for lack of intellectual courage and prowess, has never dared to directly face the free and independent Fourth Estate? Corruption and nepotism are rampant in each ministry which uses nepotism and corruption for self-aggrandizement and self-enrichment. Anti-corruption slogan and so-called inquest is a pathetic public show to punish a few petty cases for the sole and ultimate purpose of hiding and protecting Hostile Takeover kinship group. Their motto is: sacrifice the small to protect the big.

FUTURE ELECTIONS
The pain in the NEC is still there as one of its members has been arrested and jailed with bogus accusations. This is a case of “in flagrante delicto” of non respect of rule of laws and violation of human rights by the autocratic machinery. The NEC, being in the fold of the autocrat, tries to justify its continuous operations albeit against its own spirit that was set forth at the constitution of such body. It justifies its independence through its dependence towards the autocratic relationship.
It could, one day, be legally argued that all NEC’s decisions and actions are nonbinding and invalid because the NEC has not operated with full members.
Meanwhile, in order to put more pressure on the NEC to toe the ruling party’s line, the government has issued orders to post military and police personnel near the elections centers; currently military and police top brasses publicly and shamelessly are belting out threatening electoral campaign rhetoric and propaganda even before the official opening of the electoral campaign. This does not go unnoticed by the 7-million registered voters; if, wearing Black when going to vote on elections day, they voted en masse, surprised results could not be discounted.

WORLD AFFAIRS
Conducting world affairs are not just reduced to attending meetings in foreign lands without proposing or saying anything that defend the interests of Cambodia, or holding crossed hands with foreign leaders or shaking hand with other autocrats of similar kind, or betting on who’s winning the US elections, or lecturing foreign ambassadors on arrogance and incivility, or threatening international organizations with empty words, or begging for foreign money to fill up the annual national budget or for armaments to kill one’s own countrymen, or even inviting losing world pugilist to make campaign on traffic safety, or campaigning to have Phnom Penh or Siem Reap as international meetings place… or having corrupted or incompetent ambassadors posted in various world capitals behaving like dummy dolts the purpose of which is to protect Hostile Takeover’s foreign bank accounts.
Conducting proper foreign affairs is, for example: how to recuperate the Khmer land that has been recognized by the International Court of Justice; how to ensure that Cambodia frontiers are not violated or eaten into by aggressive neighbors; how to redress Cambodia standing in every international studies and surveys, from the pit upwards.
Conducting proper world affairs is to recognize that:
– history of the world is not a forgotten past,
– a small country cannot fool the world,
– the world does not always listen to a small country, and
– big and powerful country – whichever size it is – always tries to “USE” small country to serve its present and future interests, and
– to protect Cambodia’s interests in the world stage is not a play at the local theater with low caliber thespians.
In a sea of deep water where whales roam and make waves, sharks chase preys near the coast lines, a small fish could easily be swallowed up by the whale and careless and heedless swimmer could also easily become shark’s innocent prey. So, if the little fish swims in the South China Sea with the giant whale Jing Yu (鲸鱼) and suddenly a tsunami (海啸) occurs, what could the little fish do: gobbled up by the whale? or got caught up in the seismic sea wave and plunged towards the abyss of the sea?

CAMBODIANS
The repressive yoke of autocracy on Cambodian’s shoulders is so heavy on the morale and conscience of the 99% to the point that Khmer society has been fearfully traumatized by:
– the systematic and premeditated assassination of Mr. Kem Ley, followed by the ineptitude of the autocracy to conduct a full and comprehensive investigation which is accentuated by the fear that itself is implicated in the assassination plot, and forcing Mr. Kem Ley’s remaining family to leave Cambodia and his tomb in Takeo for a safer life overseas;
– the constant combined politico-police-military threat against opposition leader and activists throughout the country;
– the arrest and bogus trials of human rights workers;
– the permanent banning of all public gatherings and the constant arrests of marchers or demonstrators who lost their lands/natural habitat/houses to big entities, opaque or real, operating under the protective umbrella of Hostile Takeover;
– the total sellout of the justice system to the gratuity dispensed by the autocratic ruler, and worst of all
– the abandonment by their elected representatives who do nothing for them, but do everything for themselves and their own interests and future.

Well, Kacvey, the night of 31 December 2016 will carry all the above to the morning of 1 January 2017 and throughout, and while the 1% would be bathing in expensive champagne bubbles, the 99% couldn’t even careless about the annual passage of the Gregorian calendar; instead they are preparing themselves for tomorrow that is not going to be less chaotic or horrendous than today.

What a Friday 2 December 2016 in the City of Tonlé Buon Mouk! A day to remember for a long time to come, whether it will have good or bad consequences for the future of Khmer Politics.

By now the excitement has already subsided but each headquarters is undoubtedly busy to figure out what would be the next move by the other party. This doesn’t have the same thrill of the 2016 World Chess Championship between Magnus Carlsen and Sergei Karyakin on Wednesday 30 November 2016, but the surprise factor was so great that, exceptionally, the local media had to go out of the way to put the news online not to be outdone by social media.

So, Kacvey, you must have already read or heard tons of comments by radio/TV stations, newspapers, social media, pundits, politicians, spinners and even some ordinary men and women. But, for our part, let turn over a few stones with these questions:
– Why the royal pardon on 2 December 2016?
– Where does the pardon lead to?
– Is the pardon an end of itself, or just a temporary arrangement to serve the cause of expediency?
– Whose victory is this, if victory there is?

From the communications between the deputy opposition leader, the prime minister and the king, it could be discerned that there is nothing that could shed the light on the constitutional and legal rationale/reason/justification that support the case for the request for royal pardon.

Primo, the deputy opposition leader, in his letter of 1 December 2016, hoped that the prime minster has diligently pondered on his court case. Secundo, on 2 December 2016, the prime minister submitted a request for royal pardon to the king with a prepared draft of the pardon decree – royal pardon to be granted to the deputy opposition leader who was convicted on 4 November 2016. Tertio, on the same day the king issued a royal decree granting his pardon to the deputy opposition leader. Quarto, also on 2 December 2016, the deputy opposition leader sent thanking letters to the king and the prime minister.

It looked simple, effortless, easy and straightforward. No sweat. But, to believe that it is so, is to underestimate the power of autocracy that’s been in existence for more than 30 years.

In Khmer politics, anything that is easy today will soon be a mess, sometimes when the ink is still wet. Who could forget the statement made at end of June 2016 by the same prime minister that the deputy opposition leader could be “imprisoned forever”? Who could forget the massive mobilization of men in black sunglasses and heavy machine guns around the opposition headquarters, even with light projectors in the night? Why, suddenly, the change of heart?

Beware of the sleeping fox with one eye close.

No one is brainless to think that all of this move and dynamics would have happened without some form of preparation, mutual understanding, behind-the-scenes negotiation and compromise between unnamed go-between/intermediaries/agents or off-the books agreement. It is this secrecy that is, one day, going to be the mysterious weapon that will be used by whoever in a stronger position to turn the situation or to pivot into his favor. Remember the agreement of 22 July 2014? Where is it now? Who is in the ditch? Where is one of the signatories?

In “The Art of Warfare” (兵法), Sunzi (孙子) wrote: “So, to win a hundred victories in a hundred battles is not the highest excellence; the highest excellence is to subdue the enemy’s army without fighting at all.” (是故百战百胜, 非善之善者也, 不战而屈人之兵, 善之善者也.)

Where does the pardon lead to?

At the time of this writing, it was widely reported that the deputy opposition leader had left the headquarters of his party and returned to his home and family, and that he is even scheduled to attend the permanent committee of the national assembly on 5 December 2016. So much the better, if he could now fulfill his national responsibility as a member of parliament as well as one of the leaders of his party.

Royal pardon is a license for his recovered and restored freedom. But there are 5 human rights workers who are still paying a very heavy and horrendously unjustified price on his behalf: indefinite pre-trial detention, shackled and orange-jumpsuited. The question is: could these 5 human rights repeat the same procedure in order to seek royal pardon? If a precedent has been already set, why not use it in the name of non-discriminatory equality?

A royal pardon is indeed personal and nominal, but the mechanism that has been used for that particular person must be a mechanism that should be opened to other citizens under similar constitutional, legal and judicial criteria and circumstances. It is a well known fact that the prime minister is the key decision-making/imposing person between the deputy opposition leader and the king; he is the supreme authority in all matters, small or big, legislative, executive and judiciary. But, the people is sovereign to be critical of his subjectivity and partiality in state governance. Or to appreciate his objectivity and fairness.

Francis of Assisi, once, preached: “Where there is injury let me sow pardon.” The 5 human rights workers are still injured – not bodily – with wounds brutally and unlawfully inflicted to them and their family for trying to seek justice and to defend human rights and dignity.

Is the royal pardon an end in itself?

From the text of the royal decree, it could be gleaned that the royal pardon specifically pertained to the crime and subsequent conviction as stated in the tribunal verdict of 4 November 2016. Be it as it may, how will this royal pardon play out with other court cases against the deputy opposition leader that are still pending? There seems to be so many cards hidden in the sleeves of the prime minster who could perform magic trick against whoever that dares challenging/obstructing his power’s scheme. A case in point, the number of court cases against the minority leader looks like a string of prayer beads that prosecutors and judges play around according to their whim and impulse.

Friedrich Nietzsche, once, said: “If there is something to pardon in everything, there is also something to condemn.” When the court condemned, did it do it in accordance with and respect of the spirit of the constitution and the laws of the land? Or did it do it because some one told it to do it?

Whose victory is this?

Could the deputy opposition leader claim victory because at the end of the day he’s been pardoned, royally? Could the prime minister also claim victory for having requested the king to grant pardon to the deputy opposition leader? Who owes whom? Could two people claim victory in one battle they both engaged in? Where was the challenge for the victors, if victory there is?

If both of them wish to claim victory for themselves, it’s the Cambodian justice system that is the declared real victim/looser.

Don’t weep, Cambodia, because you loose. Get up, recoup and get ready for the next battle.